@hicky62 It is unbelievable the mindset of the two wheeled menace. They refuse to stop or slow for anyone, including peds on zebra crossings. Ride like complete knobbers showing no concern for their safety, But then love to blame all other road users who then somehow become responsible to avoid their dangerous bike riding. As in the fist clip. The speed bikey was travelling at is evident the way they had all of that road space but were still travelling too fast to stop before crashing. That was not filtering, had they have been doing so, they would have seen and given way to the turning car, as per rule 76. Instead they were steaming along like the entitled tw@ts they are. Then hve the audacity to blame everyone but themselves!!! Just look at the bikey comments trying to defend the rider in the first clip! Shows their mentality & mindset.
@@julianpenfold1638 Agree. Saw on a pro-bikey feed, guy posted a photo of his new bike 7 there was an immediate pile-on telling him to remove the reflectors, then using derogatory names for bikeys that take sensible safety precautions. I truly do not understand the mentality of bikeys. Even JV would sooner put himself under a lorry, because he thought he had 'right of way' rather than demonstrating how to avoid the collision and setting a good example to other bikeys.
@@wibbley1 I was not familiar with the term "bikey". The kind of people I'm talking about are not "bikeys" though, they are mainly young men and some older men who are kind of barking mad really - either with such little disregard for their own safety that they just don't pay attention and don't care, or young men trying to look hard in front of their mates. Both types are to be avoided because they will probably not back off.
I think delivery time pressures (bikes and vans) seem to have a massive impact on levels of impatience on the road. Just yesterday when out on my road bike, had a car behind me holding back as they were about to turn right, but was then beeped at by the delivery van behind them and I think pressured into overtaking me to then have to immediately slow for the turn. To top it off, the delivery driver was on his phone.
I agree with your comment. The only exception being royal mail. Last weekend l received an email from them saying my parcel would be delivered between 8:48 am and 12:48 pm. They had a 4 hour window yet didn't arrive till 4: 19 pm.
One of my main interests is military history, and one aspect that really started it off was the US 8th Army Air Force. Crews were obliged to complete 25 missions before being eligible to return home. Even at that time (1943) the USAAF hierarchy and the crews themselves knew the odds of getting through 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 missions - which despite having experience and saying that it should work in their favour, it didn't, the odds against the tour being completed were always against them. These cyclists are going the same way, in thinking that 'I got through that/delivery/home ok, will be alright when I do it again', the odds are always stacked against them and one day it will go wrong in one way or another.
Yeah, similar to poor driving it relies on other road users being predictable and rule-abiding. As soon as they meet someone else who thinks like them, their luck runs out
There's a reason I've been a road cyclist for over 40 years... and remained alive for over 40 years... I obey the rules of the road and think constantly about what I'm doing... I'm damned sure I'd have died years ago if I cycled like this lot.
Commendable and well done, but a lot of the problems are because the 'rules of the road' are inconsistent or open to interpretation that even driving instructors differ on (and the authorities refuse to elaborate on). That and probably 99% of people don't have a good knowledge of the highway code, let alone the newer parts, even if they agreed on interpretation, so will expect different things of situations and each other. Of course, a lot of staying safe is down to taking responsibility for one's self and having common sense, but it seems many people prefer abdicating responsibility and have no common sense whatsoever.
I think in the UK, the general perception that new laws or guidelines have ceded responsibility for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians entirely onto drivers seems to be the opinion of most cyclists. In other words, it's entirely up to the drivers to keep them safe no matter how irresponsibly they behave on the roads. And I'm a 50/50 cyclist/driver myself.
In the 1st clip the Landrover driver did give priority to the cyclist, IMO. You can only give way to something you can see, and as soon as the cyclist became visible to the LR driver they stopped completely, leaving plenty of space and time for the cyclist to continue. The cyclist crashing is separate, IMO, caused by their inability to control their own speed and steering. I think the LR driver obeyed the Highway Code perfectly, and the cyclist did it all wrong. Views ???
Totally agree. The first we see of the cyclist, it is in the Land Rover's blind spot. I think the Land Rover then starts its turn and the driver is probably looking in the direction he or she wants to go, which would be natural. As soon as they see the cyclists they come to a complete stop. The cyclist has plenty of space to their left and in front before the fence.
if the road you turning in to has space hog the curb that means no cyclists can bomb up side of you and if they try it be at very low speed prob going on to pavement . stick to curb and start to turn in later that what i do if space on the new road to enter , even places with a lot going on i do not want cyclists passing both sides it one or the other and far safer for them to pass on the right so i keep left. don't care if it annoys them or slows them down it to stop them doing something stupid and get run over
I now see less cyclists coming in the inside of my UK artic truck, but I see more car drivers attempting dangerous over or under takes in a bend. Trucks are best overtaken on a straight road where you can see hazards ahead and where HGv driver can see overtaking vehicle in his mirrors. HGV s don't do standing start competitions 😅
Yes, except the highway code says bicycle have priority to pass _waiting_ vehicles, not moving ones, so they didn't have priority at all. The Landrover did nothing strictly wrong... unless they weren't signalling at all...
After seeing this vid, I can't but help reflect on my dearly departed mothers wise words when going out to practice my driving skills with her back in 1971. "Ian I love your confidence, what I don't like is, you drive into situations that angels would fear to tread." As a professional driver from 78 - 12, I occasionally mulled over what she had said, and ten years on quickly came to the conclusion, that what I had done was to drive into situations I just didn't know what the potential outcome were . I just wonder how many in the vid can say the same, and more's to the point who knowingly caried on regardless.
I don't reckon most people even think at all, nevermind knowingly continue. It seems to be an abdication of responsibility mixed with entitlement and selfishness.
Anyone else spot the nice Mark 2 Escort? I bet none of the featured cyclist would have, judging by the lack of situational awareness displayed by this lot. Keep up the good work Ashley.
0:25, No, the COAB should not have attempted to pass the Landrover. HC 73 states "At junctions with no separate cyclist facilities, it is recommended that you proceed as if you were driving a motor vehicle." Motor vehicles do not split lanes and pass other vehicles on the inside when they're turning left. It's craazy to suggest the Landrover should have to give way here.
HC rule H3: "... Do not turn at a junction if to do so would cause the cyclist, horse rider or horse drawn vehicle going straight ahead to stop or swerve..."
@@i3d3 Not a very well thought out rule, is it. Aside from the fact that it contradicts a previously existing rule, it also rellies on the most visible vehicle giving way to the least visible. Given that the Landrover was in front of the COAB, it's a fair bet that the COAB had a last clear chance, while the Landrover driver did not. That puts the responsibility fair and square with the COAB here.
@user-to8un3gl6p I agree, it's impossible to tell from this angle. However, I'll be teaching my kids that in this situation, they should assume the Landrover is turning left. What will you be teaching yours?
@user-to8un3gl6p COAB stands for Chap on a Bike. Perhaps you should re-read that comment of yours to see if you can work out why some might find it insulting. In any case, apology accepted I guess.
@copaloadofthis I'd go one further and make lane splitting illegal. If someone is sharing my lane and I don't know they're there, that's just asking for trouble. Surely, getting in front of me isn't that important.
@@copaloadofthis But the opposite has occurred. They have intentionally given priority to bicycles passing on the left even when they are starting from behind a vehicle. It's insane. Having said that, the rule specifies they have priority over vehicles "waiting" at a junction, not ones that are moving/turning already, so cyclists should _not_ be passing like the one in the video. But unfortunately the rules are inconsistent and open to interpretation (even Ashley seems to think the cyclist has priority over a non-waiting vehicle) to such a degree that it almost guarantees injury or death in lots of common situations.
3:14 People do not expect cyclists to be up on the curb on the right. Hidden by other cars until the last second. Did not even have lights on in the dark!
4:16 that poor lorry dancing with the possibility of having an idiot crash into the back of it. Thankfully, I think the lorry would be ok and escape with out physical injury. However, the mental strain of having to constantly worry about being hit by an idiot is taking its toll on lorry's across the UK, but for just £5 per month, lorry's can get the counselling they need to overcome their struggle.
@@widearchshark3981 I mean, it might have been. You're correct. But you still check your mirror before turning left, right? Even in a left turn only lane? The ineptitude is shared. I'm only reacting with surprise to the reaction here, because normally the replies mirror Ashley's own balanced attitude of "look after each other out there" .
Slipstreaming a lorry is especially dangerous in the wet. I have in the past done this but after much maturing you do realize that even though the chance of them having to stop is low, it's not 0. That non zero event likely results in a head injury. When racing it's common to be slipstreaming cars in the convoy after an incident but in that case the drivers are heavily trained. When I used to draft lorries out of the business park I worked at it was kind of like a drug. I could do the next 2 mile section of road in 3 minutes at 40mph. This road was insanely busy and cycling normally would take me 8 minutes of close passes. One day I was sprinting up to speed behind one when my gears jumped and I went down at 32mph with another lorry behind as it was quite a busy road. Fortunately they stopped. I was insanely lucky and only snapped my fork and wheel with just a few bruises, a lot of road rash and a small gash. I had been so complacent before never worrying about the what if.
Having done a BikeSafe course, the policeman told me that a lot of the fatales they attended in London were when a cyclist had just ridden into the back of a lorry as they were head down racing and didn’t spot the lorry had slowed/stopped. Just crazy doing that. You can’t see what is happening and no one can see you. Well done on giving up that habit. Always better to get home slower than not get home at all.
@@gregp1969 quite a few of the rural roads I drive on Sundays are popular with cyclists (mostly of the MAMIL variety keeping themselves fit). Mostly they cycle well, and seem aware of their surroundings. But I do notice quite a few with the heads down and often getting caught out because they aren't looking ahead. Often it is not spotting a pot hole further up the road, so aren't ready to take a smooth line around it, and end up either taking a sharp swerve or clobbering it.
It's the case that many young people have little awareness of risk and consequence - I lost a few friends that way, albeit on motorbikes - but there is no excuse for 'mature' adults riding the way some of those were. Sadly, those consequences are pretty awful and can reach far beyond those directly involved, and may even last a lifetime.
I lve in singapore, and it's nice and refreshing to see that cycling-numpty behavior is not exclusive to Singapore, but is also common in the UK and elsewhere. A lot of people believe the problems for cyclists and motorists in Singapore are unique to singapore. In a way some issues are. But in general: Cyclists must follow the same rules of the road as if they were a vehicle. We need to have safe protected infrastructure in Singapore too.
In the first clip we don't know where the cyclist was when the Landrover driver checked their mirrors before turning, the cyclist could have been behind the Landrover in the middle of the lane and unexpectantly shot up the inside, as we don't really know i think it was wrong to assume the Landrover should have gave priority to the cyclist, the cyclist was going at some speed as well so i would assume they were not at the lights when the Landrover moved off.
@@paularckless7254 do you really think the driver checked their mirrors before turning? If they'd checked their left mirror just before they turned they would have seen the cyclist.
@@stevejohnson506 like i said we don't know where the cyclist was when the traffic started moving, we don't know if the land-rover driver used his mirrors or if he signalled, you cant automatically blame the Land-rover driver, i don't like Land-rovers i think the are owned by idiots who think they are cool when in reality they are just farm vehicles and that's where they should be, i also cycle myself but there is right and wrong and from this clip it is hard to say who is right and who is wrong.
@@paularckless7254 just in the video there's 3 clear seconds when the cyclist was visible in the land rovers left mirror. That's long enough to check your mirror. With the car following the land rover, it was unlikely that the cyclist was positioned any differently for at least a couple of seconds before that.
@@stevejohnson506 Mirror, signal, maneuver, we don't know if the land-rover driver followed that procedure and we don't know where the bike was if they did, from that clip it's impossible to say who is at fault but it does show the bike was travelling at some speed as it was unable to stop until it hit the railings.
@@paularckless7254 at least 3 whole seconds to spot a green and white bike in your left mirror. If I'd have been driving the land rover I'd have seen the cyclist.
As a cyclist who occasionally enjoys speed - there's a time and place for that and it's not in a busy city center. Rules can sometimes be safely broken but one should make absolutely certain before going through.
A lot of cyclists are blissfully unaware of highway code. Assuming that, that dude at 6:30 is just being a typical clueless cyclist. I am ashamed as I love cycling myself, but the extend of stupid shit I see cyclists do on the streets terrifies me.
1st clip.. when a car overtakes a cyclist it must keep 1.5mtrs distance, but when a fast cyclist undertakes a slow car on the inside… they can dive bomb through the tiniest of gaps without care. Until it all goes wrong of course but that’s ok because you can blame the car driver.
Yep. One of the many inconsistencies that encourage dangerous behaviour by vulnerable road users in the modern highway code. "It's dangerous pass within 1.5m of a bicycle" "It's fine to squeeze through between a car and kerb". Having said that, the rule giving priority to bicycles passing on the left says that they have priority over "waiting" vehicles, so in most situations (where cars are moving, not 'waiting' stopped) like the one in the vid, the bicycle doesn't have priority at all... Not that most people know the highway code, let alone the new bits, let alone understand it consistently...
This is why I'm starting to not like his content he seems to always take the person on the wrong side, and he seems to never post his own mistakes just other peoples and calls them out.
2:44 I have seen other bike users do similar stuff before and it's absolutely frightening. How they can just choose their own route through a junction without looking suggests they have no self guided safety. And before anyone chimes in saying it's due to the new rules, I have seen this activity before those rules came in. It's just mind numbing stupidity that causes it.
regarding the first one: deliberately overtaking a motorist on the side they are turning to is about as smart as trying to pet a dog under a "beware of dog" sign. your highway code may obligate the driver to give way to people sneaking up from behind, but the laws of physics say bicyclists are squishy.
@@stephenpalfreyman4755 Well, no. Just that I've not noticed a cyclist take time to gawp at something like that before. Not that I'm critiquing his riding either, he still kept a safe eye on the road.
1:35 I actually had to deal with a set of temporary lights the other day. The municipal roadworks for building the new foot/cycle path had to rebuild part of a bus stop, so they had closed one lane for a couple of hundred metres to accommodate the work site. I had to wait both ways, first in the queue with one car behind me. A little tedious, but ultimately no big deal. I was even able to use the opposite bus stop to let one of the cars overtake immediately after passing the light.
Regarding delivery time pressures, as a local team captain for a delivery platform that hires waged couriers, so with hourly wage, basically all waiting time is paid, I do not notice this kind of behaviour as much from my team (and myself, I'm way better since I'm not freelance anymore). That is the key I think. As captain, there is only one evaluation point about delivery speed and that practically asks about their speed in absence of danger. Contrary, there are I think 5 evalution points about their safety and behaviour in traffic. Hence with us there is more chance to be fired from breaking traffic rules than pure speed. Recently the app updated so that predicted ETAs are not shown to riders anymore, which I think should help a lot too. It is possible everyone! Now we need to do this industry wide.
Regardless of whether the driver in the first video was indicating, you should not overtake (or undertake…) approaching a junction! You have to be cautious when overtaking and leave plenty of room. Edit: to everyone who disputes this Rule 163 Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should… move quickly past the vehicle you are overtaking, once you have started to overtake. Allow plenty of room. Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left and should proceed with caution as the driver may not be able to see you. Be careful about doing so, particularly on the approach to junctions Rule 167 DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works
@@stevejohnson506 Haha, typical mealy-mouthed bikey comment, picking the bit they want and ignoring the rest. The arrogance of bikeys is unbelievable. They blast down the inside at junctions and expect all other traffic to realise there is a knob riding & slam on their brakes. I know bikeys show no situational awareness, but somehow expect all other road users to. The driver is watching ahead, to their left and to their right and also looking into the road that they are turning into (Ash himself tells us to do this) as well as look in the door mirrors. The driver has very little time for each of these, so a speeding knobby would not be seen, as in this clip & the bikey hilariously crashes into the railings. Shows how fast they were going that they were unable to stop 🤣 76 Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road. Take great care when deciding whether it is safe to pass stationary or slow-moving lorries and other long vehicles, especially at the approach to junctions, as their drivers may not be able to see you. Remember that they may have to move over to the right before turning left, and that their rear wheels may then come very close to the kerb while turning (see Rule 67).
@@wibbley1 I'm a driver. Drove cabs, vans, busses and lorries in central London. Read rule H3 aswell. Cyclists have priority when going ahead at junctions. It's that simple.
@@stevejohnson506 Does not matter what you drove, but driving a cab probably explains a lot. No bikes do not have automatic right of way at junctions. Alas this thinking just feeds into the arrogant selfish entitlement of bike riders. 76 Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road. Take great care when deciding whether it is safe to pass stationary or slow-moving lorries and other long vehicles, especially at the approach to junctions, as their drivers may not be able to see you. Remember that they may have to move over to the right before turning left, and that their rear wheels may then come very close to the kerb while turning (see Rule 67).
I was cycling in Leicester yesterday, I spotted a cycle traveling at over 30mph on a dual carriageway in the centre of the lane, no helmet, just jeans and one hand steering, he must have been on an illegally souped up electric bike. Please don't call them cyclists, they are silent and a danger to everyone especially when they use shared pedestrian and cycleways.
@@keithblower1091 also a licence and insurance.. I often see these illegal bikes sailing past me at 30+ mph through red lights, no helmet, nearly always with a food delivery bag on their back.
@@susanwestern6434that’s the worst… that these idiots with e-bikes etc zoom down cycle paths and pavements at full blast. They are essentially motorised vehicles and should be considered as such, they should be party to the same rules and regulations.
4:58 The cyclist has cars next to him very close to the kerb. I might bail out on to the pavement in that situation if I thought they were getting too close.
Too many cyclists thinking rules of the road or plain common sense doesn't apply to them you will never change that Ash, I got ripped into cycling Mikey last week in one of his videos undertaking a bus and not hanging back because he couldn't give 1.5 metres he was too busy trying to chase a car and not bothered about his safety, he didn't like it one bit
Looking at the red-light ignorers in these clips, it does remind me that so many traffic light junctions have such long dead phases where everyone is on red for ages. I think these long dead phases just encourage red-light jumping (not just by cyclists) and they know they can get away with little chance of other vehicles being in motion. If they reduced these dead times down so that if you jump a red light you're in immediate danger, then you'll stop doing it. I noticed this phasing of traffic lights is particularly bad in London, where you can be sat at a junction for ages with nobody moving. I used to drive around London a fair bit around 20 years ago, and did notice the change of phasing of traffic lights, particularly in the lead up to the introduction of the congestion change zone. These changes caused a big increase in traffic and journey times, as you would spend so much time sat stationary at traffic lights.
Driving around Gloucester today and saw several cars speeding up to get through red lights. Cyclist do it and risk their own lives. Car drivers do it risk other people’s lives.
Ah the desperate “they are more dangerous than me” excuse for breaking the law. Consequences of a car having to swerve to avoid a cyclist going through a red light and hitting some other innocent road user don’t bother you then?
2:46 was crazy, went across the road in front of traffic twice without looking. The second time was especially close. Have to wonder - drugs/drink/mental health issues?
@3:25. Middle of road, dark clothing, no lights. I have told viewers about my friend Trevor before and, as the nights start to draw in again, I say PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR KIDS HAVE WORKING LIGHTS AND CAN BE SEEN.
As someone who works in tree surgery. The amount of cyclists who disregard road closed signs and ask to 'sneak past' is as bad as pedestrians. We arent closing roads for fun.
Sounds like you might need detour signs if it's a major cycle route. You may see a quiet side street, but there may not be another safe cycle route for a few kilometres. One day on my commute a side street that links a major shared path was suddenly being dug up and repaved. The workers seemed shocked so many bikes needed to get past. I didn't know the area, but looking at the map later a detour would have been easy.
@@unsafevelocities5687 we often work on remote areas. We do have detour signs and all of that but they are often quite far back especially in remote areas. We don't control where the detour routes is that is down to ambron or whoever is closing the road for us.
@@shm5547 there are often no pavements, of there are pavements we have banksman whose job it is to direct people there but on the last job it was just a country road.
The cycling shown on here is terrible. But why do some feel the need to lump all of us cyclists into the same group and make out that we all ride like this? Where i live, poor driivng standards are ever more present than poor cycling standards, with more lethal consequences.
From my experience, cyclists not looking out of junctions or going from pavement to road is getting worse… so many times i’ve had to swerve/brake heavily because someone will be cycling on the payment then without looking just join the road its incredibly disappointing
I am from india, a delivery rider here in London. I follow rules as per Highway code. But They, other riders, ride like their own road. They are like we can do whatever we want. They should care about their's and other road users' lives such as pedestrians, cars, bus and even fellow cyclists by following rules and have patience.
Should the Landrover (0:18) have given priority though? I recently was made aware of an interpretation of the rules that makes me think that, actually, no, they shouldn't. I would be very interested to hear comment from Ashley. Highway Code Rule 76 says to cyclists going straight on "you have priority over traffic waiting to turn". The important part there is the word "waiting". The Landrover is not stationery, waiting to turn; it is moving (signalling? We can't see) and starting that turn while the cyclist is still behind them and chooses to draw alongside. Ashley will perhaps know better than me, but I got this from another instructor who suggests that the word "waiting" is used in other places in the Highway Code and does specifically mean "not moving". Further evidence is in the picture for Rule H3, where the car "waiting" that is passed on the inside by a bicycle, is intentionally drawn as stationery (to be clear, the other cars in the diagram have 'ghosts' that indicate movement. The waiting car does not). P.S. If the Landrover was not signalling then, sure, the above goes out of the window.
A lot of these rules are open to different interpretation which isn't helping anyone. As for this type of incident, you'll be daft to try and filter past a moving vehicle at a junction regardless of whether it's indicating or not.
@@davem9204 Yes, it was silly, whether or not they had official right of way, but it's interesting that even two driving instructors have different interpretations that lead one to think the opposite of the other just because of interpretations of one word: "waiting". And by interesting, I mean dangerous. And frustrating for those of us wanting to not only do the sensible thing, but the right thing.
regarding the first clip... I am sorry but if you are flying up the inside of a car turning left, that is rather on you. If there is a bike lane then there MAY be something to say about it... but in this case the cyclist was reckless... I would never have put myself in that situation
It’s not entirely on the cyclist though. The Highway Code says that you should give way to cyclists when turning left and wait for them to proceed. See Rule H3
@Boost00130 Agree, but ala it is the motorist who gets penalised for the stupidity of bikeys and in situations like this the car could be found at fault as they were not looking behind them as they turned. Of course if the car ran over someone in the side street, they would again be blamed for not looking where they were going.
I cycle and drive, and I really struggle to accept that 'give way to cyclists on the inside if you're turning left' rule. It places an unreasonable burden on the driver to see the cyclists in their mirrors, and correctly judge their speed and intentions. We don't allow turning left from the right lane in other circumstances, why in that case?
We had incident in a local park when a young man on a bike was going too fast and nearly hit us. More confusingly he did a wheelie in front of us and was wearing earphones.
The most amazing excuse I've seen by some cyclists for running red lights is that, because there are no car pillar blindspots, and they can see the whole junction, they don't need to stop, 'lights are for cars', that they need to keep moving to be safe. Which wasn't something I felt the need to while cycling in the city for years, and would also suggest that I should be able to run reds on my motorbike. It's baffling, and while I understand being defensive because we, as cyclists, are often unfairly maligned, trying to justify the bad cycling of what I consider to be a minority only confirms to the idiots that we're all suicidal cycles instead of the reality.
Right turn on red is quite common at traffic lights in the USA and has been for many years. There's no reason it couldn't work here (obviously, it would be 'left turn on red', and indeed it is being proposed). Why do British drivers think that passing a red light must be dangerous when one of the most advanced countries has codified it for many decades?
@@horsenuts1831 Maybe because their road safety statistics don't even begin to inspire confidence? 'The US does it' does not equate to 'it is good'. Usually quite the opposite when it comes to anything involving driving.
The cyclist cuts in front of me, then tries to overtake the BMW as they were turning. If you don’t see anything wrong with that then there’s something wrong unfortunately.
Cutting in front of you isn’t an issue as there’s plenty of space for cyclists, just important that you’re both safely in the right turn lane. He did cut the corner leading to confusion and risk though. I don’t think he was looking to overtake either, but using the car as a shield, still not safe but slightly different to your analysis.
@@dechh845the cyclist was looking to overtake, it so happens that the vehicle pulled off at the same time. Why would anyone use a vehicle turning as a shield, especially on the right hand side when the vehicle is also turning right!
To be fair, I think that the clip you showed on Tuesday's learning point would have been better suited to the end of Friday's cycling compilation where you could have made your fair point then, rather as a stand alone learning point. 🙂
I don't get some people, when I'm in an area of higher risk I go with the flow not try to overtake it. Probably why I've never had a frontal collision in 40 years.
OK some takes on some of the clips. 1:45 fair play I think, it seems a car and a bicycle can pass each other quite easily. I would probably not do this as a cyclist, but then again, waiting for green light and then having all these cars behind you while going 10 mph is also pretty sketchy. A case of traffic aggression is MUCH more dangerous than this. 2:40 That is quite dangerous riding there. I would in general never ride on the outside of a stopped line of cars. It is however instructive to ask the question, what else are cyclists supposed to do there? They can go on the pavement but that is against the rules. 4:47 This is actually a legitimate thing in New Zealand. The trick played by our road transport agency is that many rural motorways are designated as “expressways”. Very likely safer than riding on the type of road that in the UK is known as an A road. It is of course *not allowed* on motorways, but that is a moral judgement, not a danger judgement. And it is by far less insane than a few other things you see in the UK, like uncontrolled pedestrian crossings on 60mph dual carriageways. 5:01 In a situation like that you cannot win as a cyclist. Going on the pavement is a safe, but very slow option, and it is officially not allowed. The morally right thing to do is going on the road and waiting for green, but that is really, really dangerous on a bicycle. You’ll be a total sitting duck when the light turns green. It will be even more dangerous if there is on street parking after the intersection or if traffic merges back to one lane. (of course the cyclist in the clip manages to do something even more dumb and dangerous) 5:44 There are a few green lights visible just below where the rear view is. Are those pedestrian lights? These were green just until the moment the cyclist entered the intersection. By the looks of it all the cars had red light. Going through a 4-way pedestrian phase is a pretty safe option for cyclists (on the condition you do it a bit slower than the guy in that clip - since you’re entirely responsible for avoiding hitting any pedestrians). Note the slip road at the other side, this is another *extremely* dangerous place to wait for a green light for cyclists.
It's still there. It applies when turning alongside another vehicle. I take it this comment is about the first clip. The driver should have given way to the cyclist, however, the cyclist should have also taken responsibility for their own safety and not proceeded until they had been given priority. I'm sure you know this, but for others who might not ... Rule 73 includes "At junctions with no separate cyclist facilities, it is recommended that you proceed as if you were driving a motor vehicle", and rule 76 includes "Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road." Of course, H3 says to drivers and motorcyclists, "You should not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles going ahead when you are turning into or out of a junction" etc., so drivers and motorcycles should be letting the cyclist proceed, but as a cyclist, there's always that risk that you haven't been seen, or that the driver doesn't care, so you should check that it's safe to proceed before doing so, as in rule 76. The start of the hierarchy section also says, "The hierarchy does not remove the need for everyone to behave responsibly". H1 talks about how those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility, however, it also says, "None of this detracts from the responsibility of ALL road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety.". The start of the cyclists section says, "These rules are in addition to those in the following sections, which apply to all vehicles (except the motorway section)", so cyclists are supposed to follow the "normal" rules too. At the start of the general rules section it says, "This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders. The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident." Many of those other rules seem to be being missed or forgotten by some of the more vulnerable road users, so unfortunately they seem to be increasingly putting themselves into dangerous situations and relying on others for their safety. Personally, whether I'm in pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist, or car driver mode, I'm not going to be trusting someone else with my safety just because they are in a larger vehicle and H1 says that they bear the greatest responsibility. That doesn't help me when I'm being squished!
@@neilp1885 I fail to see why a larger vehicle should always assume more responsibility. This just gives rise to knobbies riding like they do. Filtering at more than 5mph above traffic speed should be made unlawful. As should undertaking or overtaking at junctions, whether or not it is assumed the vehicle being passed is going to turn. Every vehicle, including bikes, pogo-sticks and peds should have exactly the same responsibility to themselves and every other road user.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 Good point well made. One would think that as a driving instructor, Ash would know the road traffic act only applies to motor vehicles. Knobbies playing dress-up on two wheels (sometimes one) are exempt from all legislation. As they are 'the more vulnerable' they also have no responsibility for anyone else's safety, but all other road users have to look after theirs.
7:10 Unconventional but fairly safe manoeuvre, passing to the left of the waiting car then going right. There are risks to stopping behind the car or to the right of the car and then having to push off again into the middle of the road. He chose a path to the left which meant he could keep going, cross safely and not get in anyone’s way. I’m not sure how much Ashley knows about real world cycling, especially for this cyclist who seemed a bit inexperienced in his control of the bike.
The cyclist also indicated earlier which seems to be a very rare thing these days. I think it was the exaggerated swerve out to the left before swinging around to the right that looked dodgy. Without that initial indication the whole move would have looked a lot more iffy. Whether the car turning right saw that indication (probably not as they would have been focused on the traffic on the main road) which meant they might have been caught out by the cyclist's move.
@@davem9204 As a cyclist it’s easy to see why he did the move left. He was timing the right turn to wait for the white and blue cars to pass then going out straight after so he was basically wasting time but avoiding having to stop. Although the car turning right may not have known what he was doing he didn’t need to know. Neither did the cammer, because the cyclist didn’t get in anyone’s way and was on his way up the road before the car could turn, although it would then have needed to find a way past later. On the subject of indicating, I indicate when I can and where I’m trying to tell vehicles something I need them to know, particularly approaching right turns into a minor road, so I want to make sure following cars expect me to move into the right of the lane. There are times when indicating is impossible because you need to be braking and/or changing gear, so it’s not quite the easy operation it is in a car.
As I just said in a different comment, as someone who has ridden a lot in both the UK and mainland Europe over the years, I can say with some authority that the UK's cycle infrastructure is 90% abysmal and pointless, and nobody (drivers and cyclists alike) is educated properly about cycling safety. I'm in Belgium at the moment, and things are so different here - cyclists almost always have high-quality lanes, but they key is that they *must* be used when they are present, even by racing bikers. This reduces conflict immensely - cyclists almost never have to ride on multi-lane roads or big roundabouts. In addition, drivers almost always give way to cyclists trying to cross roads - even where the road markings suggest otherwise - and cyclists themselves behave pretty impeccably in my experience. I've not seen a single red light runner in my time here, for example.
@iamjoestafford UK roads and bike lanes maybe abysmal, however this is no mitigation for lawless bike riider, which is about 99.999% of them. I agree, if there is a bike lane, bikes should use them, but the simple fact is they refuse to do so and without full and proper legislation which is enforced, they will continue with their selfish arrogant entitled attitude. There is no (almost) no training for bike riders. Even if there were, 99.99% of them are too stupid and arrogant to take riding lessons. It seems to be a mindset and culture in the UK, that bikeys thing they are above the law & can do what ever they want. They seem to think racing on the road tour-de-france style, all in fancy dress, like a five year old wears a superman outfit is the way to ride on UK roads. Should one dare to suggest they should be licenced & forced to take riding lessons, use cycle lanes or take suitable safety precautions like wear hi-viz, the pile on from every bikey everywhere is worse than upsetting a Liverpudlian.
Really interesting, and also frustrating that it can’t be like that here in the UK. The clip at about 3:10 is a good example…while the rider is not in a good position and not making themselves easy to see, Ashley suggests they should be on the “lovely” cycle path. Maybe it is lovely, but in my experience they’re anything but, and instead are bumpy, covered in grit and glass, and generally slower and less comfortable to ride on than roads.
@@thrillhous8888 Yes but that it a typical bikey reply, only selfishly thinking about themselves. The bike lane is also there for MOTOR vehicles, to segregate them from the 'vulnerable' bikes, so they do not get blamed for collisions when knobbies try to undertake them at junctions. The roads are full of speed humps, chicanes, bike lanes, pot holes, posts stuck in the road at 6"6' spacing. Motorists have to put up with a lot too. The roads are cleared of grit due to the big bad motorists driving on it. Bikeys seem to forget that if they get all big bad motor vehicles banned, then the roads will be grit-laden just like the bikey lanes. Rather than play dress-up sunday and going out clogging up the roads with pack racing, why don't the bikeys organise themselves and go out and sweep the bike paths? Why don't the bikey groups get together and lobby parliament for bike excise duty, to solely be spent on sweeping the bike paths?
@@wibbley1 you’ve obviously got an agenda which is up to you, but the distinction between people who ride bikes and people who drive cars is weird. I do both, like loads of other people. I ride loads less than I drive. I only ride to get to work as it’s quicker than driving and getting a bus, and I do 90% of the hour long commute on a bike path, but I choose to do part of it on the road because it’s a lot quicker and I’m less likely to get a puncture. The point I was making is that people don’t have to use a bike paths just because it’s there. Just like I’d drive a route that’s quicker rather than deliberately drive on a slower road to the same place. Wouldn’t you do the same? Maybe get out on a bike for a bit and see things from another perspective. Might not change your mind, but surely it would make you more informed, rather than assuming everyone on a bike is playing dress up on a Sunday, which makes you sound a bit naive frankly.
@@thrillhous8888 I used to have a bike but I dumped it as I did not want to be associated with the knobs I see on their bikes. Either playing dressy-up lyrca like a five year old in their superhero costume or riding like entitled arrogant tw@ts. I see it every day in London, 99.999% of them are totally lawless, jumping red lights, weaving around pedestrians and are a menace to other road users, as these clips show. Bikeys often come up with the mealy-mouthed 'we don't have to use the bike lane' selfishly failing to understand it is not only for them, but to allow motorists to turn left without knobbers bombing up the inside and not have to worry about their usual menacing lawless riding. Rather than JV riding like a knob in Regents Park, he could use his profile to highlight cycle lanes need brushing and lobby parliament, instead of spending his time looking to stage a confrontation. Same goes for bikey mikey and all the other anti-car groups pretending to be pro-bike.
Specially built cycle paths should be enforced and the roads they service should be made no cycle zones. I am not talking about shared areas. I mean those built for cyclists specifically. They are usually built in response to a road having high accident rates. This would make road use safer for all.
One of the questions on my driving test many years ago was what should I be aware of when a small child is near the road. The answer was be aware you cannot predict what they could do so be ready. It seems a lot of cyclist need to be treated as if they are 5 year old and you need to be ready for anything. I don't need to watch a compilation as I have seen a lot of this in real life.
It is refreshing to see cyclists themselves critiquing other poor rider behaviours - kudos all. What would you suggest is the best way to start dealing with this problem?
6:44 there arent really that many time pressures, ive done this before. its just sheer greed and anger that fuels uber. fights and all sort break out because there are too many ppl working, still enough orders to be constantly going though. you can be in no rush, follow the rules and still come out above min wage and up to £20 an hour if you are reasonable fit assuming no illegal ebike. considering no fuel, no insurance, no real maintenance that cant be done using RUclips and a few quid a month. the people who do it think it should make them way more than it does for some reason, its a weird business that attracts not nice people
As I understand it, it is a legit distinction and I would suggest that most of the instruction in the highway code is just rules to help keep people safe and are not backed directly by law. Only the ones that say "must" are backed by laws. Most use words like "should" and only get considered as mitigating factors if you get arrested for dangerous driving or the like. Having said that it is fantastic (not) that cyclists are expected to obey the highway code and road traffic acts yet need undergo any instruction or pass any tests...
There have always been road cyclists running reds and not observing pedestrian crossings, however the rental bikes have made things a lot worse, every minute costs money, so there is an incentive to not follow the rules - not that it is worth it ultimately!
3:30 the hood and type of bike reminds me of 90% of indian guys on bikes near me, maybe know 3 of the HWC rules between the 10 of them. riding on the right side seems to be a theme you see
I don’t trust the police to not blame innocent car drivers (provided they really are innocent) in driver-cyclist collisions whereby the car doesn’t have dashcam
I've a dilemma from my club ride this week. I see someone on their way to the ride blast through a red light. I have a private word to say i wasn't impressed but a shrug and a "who cares" was the response. On the ride he realises i have a camera on and takes great umbridge at not having given permission for this his image to be captured. I'm well known for riding with a camera in this club. At the end of the ride he goes through the same red light again. The ride leaders are already miffed with him for not following instructions on pace and he's getting a bad reputation for himself. How should I handle such behaviour? Does he have a point about group rides and cameras?
If you are out on the public roads there is no expectation of privacy. Your camera is fine. This is just my opinion, but I'd say that the behaviour of club members outside of club activities is of no concern to the club unless the perpetrator is identifiable as a club member, for example, if he has a t-shirt on that identifies him as a club member.
This is nothing out of the ordinary. I see it all the time. The worst offenders are those on push bikes because of the effort it takes to get going again from a standstill.
The change in the law as made this situation even worse. When you know the law gives you priority over cars then most people will take that for granted and expect the cars to be watching out for them even if they speed through red lights. I won't be shocked if the death rate for cyclists increases rather than decreases.
I would respectfully disagree. All of the cyclists in this edition will have been cycling in the same manner prior to the rule changes. In fact most of them will probably be blissfully unaware of changes to the HC and more likely than not the HC itself. Neither myself or any other regular responsible cyclist have had a shift in our way of thinking and will continue to perceive motorists with extreme suspicion. The changes made to the HC were rewording and greater clarity to some of the more ambiguous rules in order to create a safer environment for all road users. It is a false narrative to say that people who cycle now have a sense of entitlement due to these updates and has been fuelled by the media and enflamed further through social media. Responsible cyclists still cycle responsibly. Irresponsible cyclists continue to cycle like tools. Granted there will be a handful who will challenge poor road craft. They are though few and far between and will have done the same prior to the updates.
@@TheGiff7while yes those of us who are responsible will be responsible no matter what transport we use, there are always going to be people that are idiots regardless of what transport they use and honestly since the rule changes, I've seen lots more adults riding atrociously than I did before the rule changes
Try riding a bicycle here in South Lincolnshire. Not one driver has noted the highway code changes at junctions and roundabouts etc. I always have to wait when crossing on my bike until there is no traffic as no driver gives me priority.
A lot of the riding here is shocking but all of them can stop ‘quicker’ than a car. A medium sized car weighs 1.5tonnes, a ‘heavy’ bike weighs 12kg there is a world of difference between the two. Not to mention your confusion of riding as fast as a car, 20mph on bike stops in a couple iches, cars in no way stop that quickly
@@stephenmurphy8310 'a couple inches'? 20mph is 8.94 meters per second. To decelerate from 8.94 meters per second to zero in a generous twelve inches is a deceleration of 131.1m/s². That's 13.36g. You're not staying on your bike through that, but that's okay: it doesn't have remotely enough traction to achieve that.
@@unsafevelocities5687 So about a fifth to a quarter of what a modern car can typically achieve in the dry before losing traction. Pretty good going, actually.. Is the nick a reference to a human predilection by any chance?
7:20 - To be fair, what was that KIa waiting for, a signed invitation? Maybe they were too gobsmacked about the the cyclist haha. Also, loved that last clip, great driving and sense of humour.
Working on Londons roads you need to know two simple things. 1. Cyclists don't care because if they cause an accident you pick up the cheque. 2. Cyclists don't have any rules
0:32 - You are giving advice that is contrary to the highway code. Don't beat around the bush. Just say it's wrong and endangers people so they can actually get it into their head that they shouldn't undertake a vehicle and willingly put themselves in a dangerous situation.
@@stevejohnson506 He said the cyclist should yield to the vehicle turning left "just to be safe". The highway code says the jeep should yield because they are crossing the path of a cycle and the cyclist should therefore not slow down.
I've been saying pretty much this about cyclists for literally years now. ~5:10 and this doesn't even surprise me because of how often I've seen it! ~4:30 - If you can't see my mirrors, I literally can't see you! 7:20 - The cyclist hasn't seen your cammer yet (and I know footage can take months to get from being shot to you uploading it).
Funny thing about the slip streaming at that speed, unless there's a head wind, it doesn't work, and in that case it's not slip streaming it's sheltering from the head wind. Slip streaming, sometimes called a tow, is a specific function of aerodynamics. How it works and what is going on is really interesting. It's definitely only to be used in racing, never on public roads.
Yes sorry but this Happens all over London and unfortunately there are not enough Police Officers about to stop them ! But as a Predestine I am so sick of them Cycling on the Pavement like they have a Right to go into us if they in our Space ?.
@@PedroConejo1939 No swiss cheese. Knobby was riding recklessly, rather than filtering at a safe speed, instead was blasting up the inside and had no intention of joining the flow of traffic at the junction. Had the bikey of had proper riding lessons, they would have been taught how and where to filter safely. Bikey did neither here. No fault on landrover.
Most schools in the UK no longer offer cycling proficiency courses these days, due to cost constraints and I think that's a big part of the problem. When I was young everyone did cycling proficiency and we even had a small park that had a good set up to teach us. The park had a setup that mimicked the roads, complete with traffic lights, pedestrian crossings and a roundabout specifically to teach us safe cycling. I don't see any such set ups anywhere in the UK today unfortunately.
I think many US schools no longer teach basic roadcraft, either. it should be part of basic curriculum, along with civics - which pretty obviously isn't taught in US schools, any more.
No selection of clips would be complete without someone unnecessarily sounding their horn, in this case, when the two cyclists crossed in front of the car approaching the T junction. To no one's surprise, the cyclists didn't disappear and the noise simply disturbed the peace!
2:49..... may I be so bold as to suggest a name for riders like this.... CHORLTONS ... now, what is a Chorlton. A Chorlton is defined as any cyclist who pays as little attention to what is going on around them as if they were walking in a pedestrianist manner. (Google Chorlton and the wheelies).
I am obviously not going to claim that slipstreaming a lorry (or a bus or any motor vehicle really) can be done safely. It will always be an increased risk. Even more so on a wet road like the clip at 4:09. On a dry road a concentrated cyclist should at least be able to out-brake the big vehicle unless they are centimeters behind it. Obviously the not seeing and being hidden still applies. On wet road even the ability to stop if the lorry stops starts being questionable. Personally I grew out of this about 15 years ago but I have to admit that in my twenties I did occasionally catch a slipstream behind a trolleybus on my way to work and it took some experience and maturity to stop doing that. But I am curious what others think about this: is it the same level of stupidity as blasting through an intersection on red? To me those clips seem way worse. Tiny misjudgment in timing and the cyclist will be hit by a car sideays, quite posibly thrown under another moving car etc. Both the probability of a crash and the likely consequences of that crash seem to be worse than being tightly behind a lorry. So do the clips where the cyclist is overtaking a queue of cars and the oncoming cars have to make space for him. One driver who is distracted does not move and the cyclist is sandwiched between two cars, potentially with not enough space to fit a human without braking some bones to make him more compact.
The big thing for me which is rarely mentioned is regarding oncoming vehicles who turn right as soon as the lorry has passed. There is a high possibility if the cyclist isn't extremely close that they will be missed and tagged by the vehicle turning.
@AshleyNeal-JustCycling yes, that is definitely a thing. The cyclist can mitigate this particular risk if they know how. Move closer to the lorry and more left before the intersection so that the turning car physically cannot turn sharp enough to hit them. Or move back and behind the right corner to see and be seen. This applies also whenever a cyclist is in a line of moving cars riding at speed same as the cars. Any driver not concentrating enough sees a gap in cars, the cyclist is invisible to them. So they turn through the "gap". The above described positioning seems to work well against this risk.
@@PedroConejo1939 That is why those trolleybusses on my way to work were so tempting back then - no fumes 🙂. And the old ones had very boxy shape with almost sharp corners, so nice big draft area behind them too. I never tried it but I think the ones used today are significantly more aerodynamic so you would get less out of them at the same distance.
There was a clip from a RUclips cyclist who was “drafting” behind a bus then went to move left at the same time as a pedestrian went to cross behind the bus. I commented, along with others, about how the position behind the bus meant the pedestrian likely thought they had enough time to cross between the bus and other cyclists behind the cammer. Oh how wrong was I according to the cycling fraternity that follow that particular channel. Apparently it was all on the pedestrian for not making sure it was safe and how the cyclist did a perfect job in avoiding the collision. At no point did he, or others, accept that riding too close to the bus caused half of the incident
Many grown-up cyclists are bonkers! How are you gonna use the roads without knowing the rules of road? How are you gonna put your own life in somebody else's hands? 🤯
As a driver and cyclist, it never ceases to amaze me how willing some people are to put their life on the line to save a few seconds. Amazing
@hicky62 It is unbelievable the mindset of the two wheeled menace. They refuse to stop or slow for anyone, including peds on zebra crossings. Ride like complete knobbers showing no concern for their safety,
But then love to blame all other road users who then somehow become responsible to avoid their dangerous bike riding.
As in the fist clip. The speed bikey was travelling at is evident the way they had all of that road space but were still travelling too fast to stop before crashing.
That was not filtering, had they have been doing so, they would have seen and given way to the turning car, as per rule 76. Instead they were steaming along like the entitled tw@ts they are. Then hve the audacity to blame everyone but themselves!!!
Just look at the bikey comments trying to defend the rider in the first clip! Shows their mentality & mindset.
They’re very happy to put everyone around them at risk as well.
With some it's nothing to do with saving seconds and everything to do with bravado - following rules for them makes you look weak.
@@julianpenfold1638 Agree. Saw on a pro-bikey feed, guy posted a photo of his new bike 7 there was an immediate pile-on telling him to remove the reflectors, then using derogatory names for bikeys that take sensible safety precautions.
I truly do not understand the mentality of bikeys. Even JV would sooner put himself under a lorry, because he thought he had 'right of way' rather than demonstrating how to avoid the collision and setting a good example to other bikeys.
@@wibbley1 I was not familiar with the term "bikey". The kind of people I'm talking about are not "bikeys" though, they are mainly young men and some older men who are kind of barking mad really - either with such little disregard for their own safety that they just don't pay attention and don't care, or young men trying to look hard in front of their mates. Both types are to be avoided because they will probably not back off.
I think delivery time pressures (bikes and vans) seem to have a massive impact on levels of impatience on the road. Just yesterday when out on my road bike, had a car behind me holding back as they were about to turn right, but was then beeped at by the delivery van behind them and I think pressured into overtaking me to then have to immediately slow for the turn. To top it off, the delivery driver was on his phone.
I agree with your comment. The only exception being royal mail. Last weekend l received an email from them saying my parcel would be delivered between 8:48 am and 12:48 pm. They had a 4 hour window yet didn't arrive till 4: 19 pm.
@@scotsman555 Royal Mail are fairly notorious for risky driving though, and especially dangerous parking.
2:50 "All over the road" - absolutely fitting bit of music
Was just wondering if I heard that right!
haha I never heard that first time as my sound was too low, good spot! 👍👍🤣🤣
I didn't know if that was from the radio or superimposed afterwards, but it seems to be from the radio!
One of my main interests is military history, and one aspect that really started it off was the US 8th Army Air Force. Crews were obliged to complete 25 missions before being eligible to return home. Even at that time (1943) the USAAF hierarchy and the crews themselves knew the odds of getting through 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 missions - which despite having experience and saying that it should work in their favour, it didn't, the odds against the tour being completed were always against them. These cyclists are going the same way, in thinking that 'I got through that/delivery/home ok, will be alright when I do it again', the odds are always stacked against them and one day it will go wrong in one way or another.
Yeah, similar to poor driving it relies on other road users being predictable and rule-abiding. As soon as they meet someone else who thinks like them, their luck runs out
What is the chances of anyone coming here for cycling reading past the first 2 sentances about the 8th Air Force?
There's a reason I've been a road cyclist for over 40 years... and remained alive for over 40 years... I obey the rules of the road and think constantly about what I'm doing... I'm damned sure I'd have died years ago if I cycled like this lot.
Commendable and well done, but a lot of the problems are because the 'rules of the road' are inconsistent or open to interpretation that even driving instructors differ on (and the authorities refuse to elaborate on).
That and probably 99% of people don't have a good knowledge of the highway code, let alone the newer parts, even if they agreed on interpretation, so will expect different things of situations and each other.
Of course, a lot of staying safe is down to taking responsibility for one's self and having common sense, but it seems many people prefer abdicating responsibility and have no common sense whatsoever.
Lots of cyclists have been killed while cycling perfectly legally and safely. So please don't try and infer otherwise.
@@garyboyle695 I think that's unfair criticism. I don't believe the poster was inferring that in any way.
I think in the UK, the general perception that new laws or guidelines have ceded responsibility for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians entirely onto drivers seems to be the opinion of most cyclists.
In other words, it's entirely up to the drivers to keep them safe no matter how irresponsibly they behave on the roads.
And I'm a 50/50 cyclist/driver myself.
In the 1st clip the Landrover driver did give priority to the cyclist, IMO. You can only give way to something you can see, and as soon as the cyclist became visible to the LR driver they stopped completely, leaving plenty of space and time for the cyclist to continue. The cyclist crashing is separate, IMO, caused by their inability to control their own speed and steering.
I think the LR driver obeyed the Highway Code perfectly, and the cyclist did it all wrong. Views ???
Totally agree. The first we see of the cyclist, it is in the Land Rover's blind spot. I think the Land Rover then starts its turn and the driver is probably looking in the direction he or she wants to go, which would be natural. As soon as they see the cyclists they come to a complete stop. The cyclist has plenty of space to their left and in front before the fence.
if the road you turning in to has space hog the curb that means no cyclists can bomb up side of you and if they try it be at very low speed prob going on to pavement . stick to curb and start to turn in later that what i do if space on the new road to enter , even places with a lot going on i do not want cyclists passing both sides it one or the other and far safer for them to pass on the right so i keep left. don't care if it annoys them or slows them down it to stop them doing something stupid and get run over
I now see less cyclists coming in the inside of my UK artic truck, but I see more car drivers attempting dangerous over or under takes in a bend.
Trucks are best overtaken on a straight road where you can see hazards ahead and where HGv driver can see overtaking vehicle in his mirrors. HGV s don't do standing start competitions 😅
Yes, except the highway code says bicycle have priority to pass _waiting_ vehicles, not moving ones, so they didn't have priority at all.
The Landrover did nothing strictly wrong... unless they weren't signalling at all...
Thank you for featuring my clips again, I really dislike bad cyclists giving us good ones a bad name.
My pleasure Matt. Thanks as always for your support.
“bad” cyclists do not give “good” cyclists a bad name. I never hear Ashley complaining that bad motorists are giving good motorists a bad name.
@@shm5547 ok that’s a fair point, I guess it’s just perceived more via social media about idiot cyclists.
Bad examples are often a lot more visible than good examples. It’s how it’s easy to think the bad are the majority.
@@TheJimNorth that’s very true unfortunately.
After seeing this vid, I can't but help reflect on my dearly departed mothers wise words when going out to practice my driving skills with her back in 1971. "Ian I love your confidence, what I don't like is, you drive into situations that angels would fear to tread."
As a professional driver from 78 - 12, I occasionally mulled over what she had said, and ten years on quickly came to the conclusion, that what I had done was to drive into situations I just didn't know what the potential outcome were .
I just wonder how many in the vid can say the same, and more's to the point who knowingly caried on regardless.
I don't reckon most people even think at all, nevermind knowingly continue.
It seems to be an abdication of responsibility mixed with entitlement and selfishness.
Anyone else spot the nice Mark 2 Escort? I bet none of the featured cyclist would have, judging by the lack of situational awareness displayed by this lot. Keep up the good work Ashley.
7:26 😎 looked pretty sweet
0:25, No, the COAB should not have attempted to pass the Landrover. HC 73 states "At junctions with no separate cyclist facilities, it is recommended that you proceed as if you were driving a motor vehicle." Motor vehicles do not split lanes and pass other vehicles on the inside when they're turning left. It's craazy to suggest the Landrover should have to give way here.
HC rule H3: "... Do not turn at a junction if to do so would cause the cyclist, horse rider or horse drawn vehicle going straight ahead to stop or swerve..."
@@i3d3 Not a very well thought out rule, is it. Aside from the fact that it contradicts a previously existing rule, it also rellies on the most visible vehicle giving way to the least visible.
Given that the Landrover was in front of the COAB, it's a fair bet that the COAB had a last clear chance, while the Landrover driver did not. That puts the responsibility fair and square with the COAB here.
@user-to8un3gl6p I agree, it's impossible to tell from this angle. However, I'll be teaching my kids that in this situation, they should assume the Landrover is turning left. What will you be teaching yours?
@@user-to8un3gl6p WOW, Talk about projection. You're the one getting all personal. I haven't said anything insulting, but you certainly have.
@user-to8un3gl6p COAB stands for Chap on a Bike. Perhaps you should re-read that comment of yours to see if you can work out why some might find it insulting. In any case, apology accepted I guess.
Sorry but undertaking a vehicle with a left signal on a bike is suicide.
And should be made illegal ..
@copaloadofthis I'd go one further and make lane splitting illegal. If someone is sharing my lane and I don't know they're there, that's just asking for trouble. Surely, getting in front of me isn't that important.
@@copaloadofthis But the opposite has occurred. They have intentionally given priority to bicycles passing on the left even when they are starting from behind a vehicle. It's insane.
Having said that, the rule specifies they have priority over vehicles "waiting" at a junction, not ones that are moving/turning already, so cyclists should _not_ be passing like the one in the video.
But unfortunately the rules are inconsistent and open to interpretation (even Ashley seems to think the cyclist has priority over a non-waiting vehicle) to such a degree that it almost guarantees injury or death in lots of common situations.
Don't be sorry, you're absolutely right. I rarely pass a vehicle on the left and NEVER if they have a left signal slowing.
@@Disposalistit was waiting to turn left when it was sat at the lights.
3:14 People do not expect cyclists to be up on the curb on the right. Hidden by other cars until the last second. Did not even have lights on in the dark!
4:16 that poor lorry dancing with the possibility of having an idiot crash into the back of it. Thankfully, I think the lorry would be ok and escape with out physical injury. However, the mental strain of having to constantly worry about being hit by an idiot is taking its toll on lorry's across the UK, but for just £5 per month, lorry's can get the counselling they need to overcome their struggle.
Sorry Ashley... What? That Land Rover had no clue that bike was coming up the side at high speed. They did a superb job spotting them at all.
If you watch it with the assumption that the Range Rover wasn't signalling, the clip make more sense. But of course, that is an assumption.
Do they not come equipped with mirrors?
A Land Rover in central London, I bet that has never got any mud on it.
@@GearsWeNeverUse36 well it may have been a turn left only lane anyway.
Honestly, it doesn't matter imo. Cyclist was inept.
@@widearchshark3981 I mean, it might have been. You're correct. But you still check your mirror before turning left, right? Even in a left turn only lane? The ineptitude is shared. I'm only reacting with surprise to the reaction here, because normally the replies mirror Ashley's own balanced attitude of "look after each other out there" .
Slipstreaming a lorry is especially dangerous in the wet. I have in the past done this but after much maturing you do realize that even though the chance of them having to stop is low, it's not 0. That non zero event likely results in a head injury. When racing it's common to be slipstreaming cars in the convoy after an incident but in that case the drivers are heavily trained. When I used to draft lorries out of the business park I worked at it was kind of like a drug. I could do the next 2 mile section of road in 3 minutes at 40mph. This road was insanely busy and cycling normally would take me 8 minutes of close passes. One day I was sprinting up to speed behind one when my gears jumped and I went down at 32mph with another lorry behind as it was quite a busy road. Fortunately they stopped. I was insanely lucky and only snapped my fork and wheel with just a few bruises, a lot of road rash and a small gash. I had been so complacent before never worrying about the what if.
Having done a BikeSafe course, the policeman told me that a lot of the fatales they attended in London were when a cyclist had just ridden into the back of a lorry as they were head down racing and didn’t spot the lorry had slowed/stopped. Just crazy doing that. You can’t see what is happening and no one can see you. Well done on giving up that habit. Always better to get home slower than not get home at all.
@@gregp1969 quite a few of the rural roads I drive on Sundays are popular with cyclists (mostly of the MAMIL variety keeping themselves fit). Mostly they cycle well, and seem aware of their surroundings. But I do notice quite a few with the heads down and often getting caught out because they aren't looking ahead. Often it is not spotting a pot hole further up the road, so aren't ready to take a smooth line around it, and end up either taking a sharp swerve or clobbering it.
It's the case that many young people have little awareness of risk and consequence - I lost a few friends that way, albeit on motorbikes - but there is no excuse for 'mature' adults riding the way some of those were. Sadly, those consequences are pretty awful and can reach far beyond those directly involved, and may even last a lifetime.
I lve in singapore, and it's nice and refreshing to see that cycling-numpty behavior is not exclusive to Singapore, but is also common in the UK and elsewhere.
A lot of people believe the problems for cyclists and motorists in Singapore are unique to singapore. In a way some issues are. But in general: Cyclists must follow the same rules of the road as if they were a vehicle. We need to have safe protected infrastructure in Singapore too.
yep, Singapore is well behind the times
@shm5547 If bikes in Singapore have to follow the sa rules as cars, then it sounds like they're ahead of the times.
In the first clip we don't know where the cyclist was when the Landrover driver checked their mirrors before turning, the cyclist could have been behind the Landrover in the middle of the lane and unexpectantly shot up the inside, as we don't really know i think it was wrong to assume the Landrover should have gave priority to the cyclist, the cyclist was going at some speed as well so i would assume they were not at the lights when the Landrover moved off.
@@paularckless7254 do you really think the driver checked their mirrors before turning? If they'd checked their left mirror just before they turned they would have seen the cyclist.
@@stevejohnson506 like i said we don't know where the cyclist was when the traffic started moving, we don't know if the land-rover driver used his mirrors or if he signalled, you cant automatically blame the Land-rover driver, i don't like Land-rovers i think the are owned by idiots who think they are cool when in reality they are just farm vehicles and that's where they should be, i also cycle myself but there is right and wrong and from this clip it is hard to say who is right and who is wrong.
@@paularckless7254 just in the video there's 3 clear seconds when the cyclist was visible in the land rovers left mirror. That's long enough to check your mirror. With the car following the land rover, it was unlikely that the cyclist was positioned any differently for at least a couple of seconds before that.
@@stevejohnson506 Mirror, signal, maneuver, we don't know if the land-rover driver followed that procedure and we don't know where the bike was if they did, from that clip it's impossible to say who is at fault but it does show the bike was travelling at some speed as it was unable to stop until it hit the railings.
@@paularckless7254 at least 3 whole seconds to spot a green and white bike in your left mirror. If I'd have been driving the land rover I'd have seen the cyclist.
As a cyclist who occasionally enjoys speed - there's a time and place for that and it's not in a busy city center. Rules can sometimes be safely broken but one should make absolutely certain before going through.
True man. Though I hope you can get off the amphetamines soon
I kept singing Queen Don't stop me now in my head while watching some of these.
And the scene where it was used in Shaun Of The Dead.
A lot of cyclists are blissfully unaware of highway code. Assuming that, that dude at 6:30 is just being a typical clueless cyclist. I am ashamed as I love cycling myself, but the extend of stupid shit I see cyclists do on the streets terrifies me.
1st clip.. when a car overtakes a cyclist it must keep 1.5mtrs distance, but when a fast cyclist undertakes a slow car on the inside… they can dive bomb through the tiniest of gaps without care.
Until it all goes wrong of course but that’s ok because you can blame the car driver.
Yep. One of the many inconsistencies that encourage dangerous behaviour by vulnerable road users in the modern highway code.
"It's dangerous pass within 1.5m of a bicycle"
"It's fine to squeeze through between a car and kerb".
Having said that, the rule giving priority to bicycles passing on the left says that they have priority over "waiting" vehicles, so in most situations (where cars are moving, not 'waiting' stopped) like the one in the vid, the bicycle doesn't have priority at all...
Not that most people know the highway code, let alone the new bits, let alone understand it consistently...
Not "Must", "should not must
This is why I'm starting to not like his content he seems to always take the person on the wrong side, and he seems to never post his own mistakes just other peoples and calls them out.
2:44 I have seen other bike users do similar stuff before and it's absolutely frightening. How they can just choose their own route through a junction without looking suggests they have no self guided safety. And before anyone chimes in saying it's due to the new rules, I have seen this activity before those rules came in. It's just mind numbing stupidity that causes it.
regarding the first one: deliberately overtaking a motorist on the side they are turning to is about as smart as trying to pet a dog under a "beware of dog" sign. your highway code may obligate the driver to give way to people sneaking up from behind, but the laws of physics say bicyclists are squishy.
2:24 Even the other cyclist behind the cammer had to do a double take at that cyclist's idiocy!
what does that even mean? EVEN the other cyclist? Like all cyclists behave the same? All 7.5 million of them?
@@stephenpalfreyman4755 Well, no. Just that I've not noticed a cyclist take time to gawp at something like that before. Not that I'm critiquing his riding either, he still kept a safe eye on the road.
7:52 hands up if you need lessons
1:35 I actually had to deal with a set of temporary lights the other day. The municipal roadworks for building the new foot/cycle path had to rebuild part of a bus stop, so they had closed one lane for a couple of hundred metres to accommodate the work site. I had to wait both ways, first in the queue with one car behind me. A little tedious, but ultimately no big deal. I was even able to use the opposite bus stop to let one of the cars overtake immediately after passing the light.
Regarding delivery time pressures, as a local team captain for a delivery platform that hires waged couriers, so with hourly wage, basically all waiting time is paid, I do not notice this kind of behaviour as much from my team (and myself, I'm way better since I'm not freelance anymore). That is the key I think. As captain, there is only one evaluation point about delivery speed and that practically asks about their speed in absence of danger. Contrary, there are I think 5 evalution points about their safety and behaviour in traffic. Hence with us there is more chance to be fired from breaking traffic rules than pure speed. Recently the app updated so that predicted ETAs are not shown to riders anymore, which I think should help a lot too. It is possible everyone! Now we need to do this industry wide.
Cyclist shouldn't be coming up left hand side of Land rover that's death wish stupidity
Entitled lime bike rider. Enough said.
Regardless of whether the driver in the first video was indicating, you should not overtake (or undertake…) approaching a junction! You have to be cautious when overtaking and leave plenty of room.
Edit: to everyone who disputes this
Rule 163
Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so.
You should… move quickly past the vehicle you are overtaking, once you have started to overtake. Allow plenty of room.
Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left and should proceed with caution as the driver may not be able to see you. Be careful about doing so, particularly on the approach to junctions
Rule 167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works
That's not what the highway code says regarding cyclists. Read rule 76.
@@stevejohnson506That rule is asking for trouble
@@stevejohnson506 Haha, typical mealy-mouthed bikey comment, picking the bit they want and ignoring the rest.
The arrogance of bikeys is unbelievable. They blast down the inside at junctions and expect all other traffic to realise there is a knob riding & slam on their brakes. I know bikeys show no situational awareness, but somehow expect all other road users to.
The driver is watching ahead, to their left and to their right and also looking into the road that they are turning into (Ash himself tells us to do this) as well as look in the door mirrors. The driver has very little time for each of these, so a speeding knobby would not be seen, as in this clip & the bikey hilariously crashes into the railings. Shows how fast they were going that they were unable to stop 🤣
76
Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road.
Take great care when deciding whether it is safe to pass stationary or slow-moving lorries and other long vehicles, especially at the approach to junctions, as their drivers may not be able to see you. Remember that they may have to move over to the right before turning left, and that their rear wheels may then come very close to the kerb while turning (see Rule 67).
@@wibbley1 I'm a driver. Drove cabs, vans, busses and lorries in central London. Read rule H3 aswell. Cyclists have priority when going ahead at junctions. It's that simple.
@@stevejohnson506 Does not matter what you drove, but driving a cab probably explains a lot.
No bikes do not have automatic right of way at junctions.
Alas this thinking just feeds into the arrogant selfish entitlement of bike riders.
76
Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road.
Take great care when deciding whether it is safe to pass stationary or slow-moving lorries and other long vehicles, especially at the approach to junctions, as their drivers may not be able to see you. Remember that they may have to move over to the right before turning left, and that their rear wheels may then come very close to the kerb while turning (see Rule 67).
I was cycling in Leicester yesterday, I spotted a cycle traveling at over 30mph on a dual carriageway in the centre of the lane, no helmet, just jeans and one hand steering, he must have been on an illegally souped up electric bike. Please don't call them cyclists, they are silent and a danger to everyone especially when they use shared pedestrian and cycleways.
you can, quite legally, ride a 50cc scooter on a dual-carriageway whilst one hand is off the bars indicating.
@@shm5547 Not without an helmet and I know the difference between a cycle and a 50cc scooter.
@@keithblower1091 also a licence and insurance.. I often see these illegal bikes sailing past me at 30+ mph through red lights, no helmet, nearly always with a food delivery bag on their back.
@@igotes Also on footways with no consideration for other people.
@@susanwestern6434that’s the worst… that these idiots with e-bikes etc zoom down cycle paths and pavements at full blast. They are essentially motorised vehicles and should be considered as such, they should be party to the same rules and regulations.
4:58 The cyclist has cars next to him very close to the kerb. I might bail out on to the pavement in that situation if I thought they were getting too close.
2.50 appropriate song "all over the road"!
Too many cyclists thinking rules of the road or plain common sense doesn't apply to them you will never change that Ash, I got ripped into cycling Mikey last week in one of his videos undertaking a bus and not hanging back because he couldn't give 1.5 metres he was too busy trying to chase a car and not bothered about his safety, he didn't like it one bit
Looking at the red-light ignorers in these clips, it does remind me that so many traffic light junctions have such long dead phases where everyone is on red for ages. I think these long dead phases just encourage red-light jumping (not just by cyclists) and they know they can get away with little chance of other vehicles being in motion. If they reduced these dead times down so that if you jump a red light you're in immediate danger, then you'll stop doing it.
I noticed this phasing of traffic lights is particularly bad in London, where you can be sat at a junction for ages with nobody moving. I used to drive around London a fair bit around 20 years ago, and did notice the change of phasing of traffic lights, particularly in the lead up to the introduction of the congestion change zone. These changes caused a big increase in traffic and journey times, as you would spend so much time sat stationary at traffic lights.
Driving around Gloucester today and saw several cars speeding up to get through red lights. Cyclist do it and risk their own lives. Car drivers do it risk other people’s lives.
Ah the desperate “they are more dangerous than me” excuse for breaking the law. Consequences of a car having to swerve to avoid a cyclist going through a red light and hitting some other innocent road user don’t bother you then?
2:46 was crazy, went across the road in front of traffic twice without looking. The second time was especially close. Have to wonder - drugs/drink/mental health issues?
Probably on drugs *and* a drug dealer
You mentioned momentum, is that new to the highway code? in regards to?
@3:25. Middle of road, dark clothing, no lights.
I have told viewers about my friend Trevor before and, as the nights start to draw in again, I say PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR KIDS HAVE WORKING LIGHTS AND CAN BE SEEN.
As someone who works in tree surgery. The amount of cyclists who disregard road closed signs and ask to 'sneak past' is as bad as pedestrians. We arent closing roads for fun.
well, road closed often means pavement open
Sounds like you might need detour signs if it's a major cycle route. You may see a quiet side street, but there may not be another safe cycle route for a few kilometres.
One day on my commute a side street that links a major shared path was suddenly being dug up and repaved. The workers seemed shocked so many bikes needed to get past. I didn't know the area, but looking at the map later a detour would have been easy.
@@unsafevelocities5687 we often work on remote areas. We do have detour signs and all of that but they are often quite far back especially in remote areas. We don't control where the detour routes is that is down to ambron or whoever is closing the road for us.
@@shm5547 there are often no pavements, of there are pavements we have banksman whose job it is to direct people there but on the last job it was just a country road.
@@matthewlockley2831 Fair enough. I did assume this was in a city.
The cycling shown on here is terrible. But why do some feel the need to lump all of us cyclists into the same group and make out that we all ride like this? Where i live, poor driivng standards are ever more present than poor cycling standards, with more lethal consequences.
From my experience, cyclists not looking out of junctions or going from pavement to road is getting worse… so many times i’ve had to swerve/brake heavily because someone will be cycling on the payment then without looking just join the road its incredibly disappointing
I am from india, a delivery rider here in London. I follow rules as per Highway code. But They, other riders, ride like their own road. They are like we can do whatever we want. They should care about their's and other road users' lives such as pedestrians, cars, bus and even fellow cyclists by following rules and have patience.
Should the Landrover (0:18) have given priority though?
I recently was made aware of an interpretation of the rules that makes me think that, actually, no, they shouldn't. I would be very interested to hear comment from Ashley.
Highway Code Rule 76 says to cyclists going straight on "you have priority over traffic waiting to turn".
The important part there is the word "waiting". The Landrover is not stationery, waiting to turn; it is moving (signalling? We can't see) and starting that turn while the cyclist is still behind them and chooses to draw alongside.
Ashley will perhaps know better than me, but I got this from another instructor who suggests that the word "waiting" is used in other places in the Highway Code and does specifically mean "not moving".
Further evidence is in the picture for Rule H3, where the car "waiting" that is passed on the inside by a bicycle, is intentionally drawn as stationery (to be clear, the other cars in the diagram have 'ghosts' that indicate movement. The waiting car does not).
P.S. If the Landrover was not signalling then, sure, the above goes out of the window.
A lot of these rules are open to different interpretation which isn't helping anyone.
As for this type of incident, you'll be daft to try and filter past a moving vehicle at a junction regardless of whether it's indicating or not.
@@davem9204 Yes, it was silly, whether or not they had official right of way, but it's interesting that even two driving instructors have different interpretations that lead one to think the opposite of the other just because of interpretations of one word: "waiting".
And by interesting, I mean dangerous.
And frustrating for those of us wanting to not only do the sensible thing, but the right thing.
The only thing that's going to stop most of these examples will be the laws of physics... and they probably think even those rules can be ignored.
regarding the first clip... I am sorry but if you are flying up the inside of a car turning left, that is rather on you. If there is a bike lane then there MAY be something to say about it... but in this case the cyclist was reckless... I would never have put myself in that situation
It’s not entirely on the cyclist though. The Highway Code says that you should give way to cyclists when turning left and wait for them to proceed. See Rule H3
@@QiuEnnan no, but there is a thing as being right and dead.
@Boost00130 Agree, but ala it is the motorist who gets penalised for the stupidity of bikeys and in situations like this the car could be found at fault as they were not looking behind them as they turned.
Of course if the car ran over someone in the side street, they would again be blamed for not looking where they were going.
@@QiuEnnan There is every chance that driver could have missed a 20mph bike flying up the inside.
I cycle and drive, and I really struggle to accept that 'give way to cyclists on the inside if you're turning left' rule. It places an unreasonable burden on the driver to see the cyclists in their mirrors, and correctly judge their speed and intentions. We don't allow turning left from the right lane in other circumstances, why in that case?
We had incident in a local park when a young man on a bike was going too fast and nearly hit us. More confusingly he did a wheelie in front of us and was wearing earphones.
London Dashcam has just uploaded a cyclist special as well🥳
7:15 what is that dome thing please?
The most amazing excuse I've seen by some cyclists for running red lights is that, because there are no car pillar blindspots, and they can see the whole junction, they don't need to stop, 'lights are for cars', that they need to keep moving to be safe. Which wasn't something I felt the need to while cycling in the city for years, and would also suggest that I should be able to run reds on my motorbike. It's baffling, and while I understand being defensive because we, as cyclists, are often unfairly maligned, trying to justify the bad cycling of what I consider to be a minority only confirms to the idiots that we're all suicidal cycles instead of the reality.
Right turn on red is quite common at traffic lights in the USA and has been for many years. There's no reason it couldn't work here (obviously, it would be 'left turn on red', and indeed it is being proposed). Why do British drivers think that passing a red light must be dangerous when one of the most advanced countries has codified it for many decades?
@@horsenuts1831 Maybe because their road safety statistics don't even begin to inspire confidence? 'The US does it' does not equate to 'it is good'. Usually quite the opposite when it comes to anything involving driving.
Momentum Momentum Momentum, a cyclists mantra.
I don't understand what's wrong with 3:49...?
The cyclist cuts in front of me, then tries to overtake the BMW as they were turning.
If you don’t see anything wrong with that then there’s something wrong unfortunately.
Cutting in front of you isn’t an issue as there’s plenty of space for cyclists, just important that you’re both safely in the right turn lane. He did cut the corner leading to confusion and risk though. I don’t think he was looking to overtake either, but using the car as a shield, still not safe but slightly different to your analysis.
@@dechh845the cyclist was looking to overtake, it so happens that the vehicle pulled off at the same time. Why would anyone use a vehicle turning as a shield, especially on the right hand side when the vehicle is also turning right!
To be fair, I think that the clip you showed on Tuesday's learning point would have been better suited to the end of Friday's cycling compilation where you could have made your fair point then, rather as a stand alone learning point. 🙂
I don't get some people, when I'm in an area of higher risk I go with the flow not try to overtake it. Probably why I've never had a frontal collision in 40 years.
OK some takes on some of the clips.
1:45 fair play I think, it seems a car and a bicycle can pass each other quite easily. I would probably not do this as a cyclist, but then again, waiting for green light and then having all these cars behind you while going 10 mph is also pretty sketchy. A case of traffic aggression is MUCH more dangerous than this.
2:40 That is quite dangerous riding there. I would in general never ride on the outside of a stopped line of cars. It is however instructive to ask the question, what else are cyclists supposed to do there? They can go on the pavement but that is against the rules.
4:47 This is actually a legitimate thing in New Zealand. The trick played by our road transport agency is that many rural motorways are designated as “expressways”. Very likely safer than riding on the type of road that in the UK is known as an A road. It is of course *not allowed* on motorways, but that is a moral judgement, not a danger judgement. And it is by far less insane than a few other things you see in the UK, like uncontrolled pedestrian crossings on 60mph dual carriageways.
5:01 In a situation like that you cannot win as a cyclist. Going on the pavement is a safe, but very slow option, and it is officially not allowed. The morally right thing to do is going on the road and waiting for green, but that is really, really dangerous on a bicycle. You’ll be a total sitting duck when the light turns green. It will be even more dangerous if there is on street parking after the intersection or if traffic merges back to one lane.
(of course the cyclist in the clip manages to do something even more dumb and dangerous)
5:44 There are a few green lights visible just below where the rear view is. Are those pedestrian lights? These were green just until the moment the cyclist entered the intersection. By the looks of it all the cars had red light. Going through a 4-way pedestrian phase is a pretty safe option for cyclists (on the condition you do it a bit slower than the guy in that clip - since you’re entirely responsible for avoiding hitting any pedestrians). Note the slip road at the other side, this is another *extremely* dangerous place to wait for a green light for cyclists.
I thought we was going to see a minibus at 1:19 with a driver beeping the horn 😁
Sorry to disappoint, this roundabout is popular in my clips! 🤣
Whatever happened to Rule 74? You know, the one that says "Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left."
@nello, you are forgetting the highway code or road traffic act does not apply to bikes.
@@wibbley1 but Ashley should.
It's still there. It applies when turning alongside another vehicle.
I take it this comment is about the first clip. The driver should have given way to the cyclist, however, the cyclist should have also taken responsibility for their own safety and not proceeded until they had been given priority.
I'm sure you know this, but for others who might not ...
Rule 73 includes "At junctions with no separate cyclist facilities, it is recommended that you proceed as if you were driving a motor vehicle", and rule 76 includes "Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road."
Of course, H3 says to drivers and motorcyclists, "You should not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles going ahead when you are turning into or out of a junction" etc., so drivers and motorcycles should be letting the cyclist proceed, but as a cyclist, there's always that risk that you haven't been seen, or that the driver doesn't care, so you should check that it's safe to proceed before doing so, as in rule 76. The start of the hierarchy section also says, "The hierarchy does not remove the need for everyone to behave responsibly".
H1 talks about how those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility, however, it also says, "None of this detracts from the responsibility of ALL road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety.".
The start of the cyclists section says, "These rules are in addition to those in the following sections, which apply to all vehicles (except the motorway section)", so cyclists are supposed to follow the "normal" rules too.
At the start of the general rules section it says, "This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders. The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident."
Many of those other rules seem to be being missed or forgotten by some of the more vulnerable road users, so unfortunately they seem to be increasingly putting themselves into dangerous situations and relying on others for their safety.
Personally, whether I'm in pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist, or car driver mode, I'm not going to be trusting someone else with my safety just because they are in a larger vehicle and H1 says that they bear the greatest responsibility. That doesn't help me when I'm being squished!
@@neilp1885 I fail to see why a larger vehicle should always assume more responsibility.
This just gives rise to knobbies riding like they do.
Filtering at more than 5mph above traffic speed should be made unlawful. As should undertaking or overtaking at junctions, whether or not it is assumed the vehicle being passed is going to turn.
Every vehicle, including bikes, pogo-sticks and peds should have exactly the same responsibility to themselves and every other road user.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 Good point well made. One would think that as a driving instructor, Ash would know the road traffic act only applies to motor vehicles. Knobbies playing dress-up on two wheels (sometimes one) are exempt from all legislation.
As they are 'the more vulnerable' they also have no responsibility for anyone else's safety, but all other road users have to look after theirs.
7:10 Unconventional but fairly safe manoeuvre, passing to the left of the waiting car then going right. There are risks to stopping behind the car or to the right of the car and then having to push off again into the middle of the road. He chose a path to the left which meant he could keep going, cross safely and not get in anyone’s way. I’m not sure how much Ashley knows about real world cycling, especially for this cyclist who seemed a bit inexperienced in his control of the bike.
The cyclist also indicated earlier which seems to be a very rare thing these days. I think it was the exaggerated swerve out to the left before swinging around to the right that looked dodgy. Without that initial indication the whole move would have looked a lot more iffy. Whether the car turning right saw that indication (probably not as they would have been focused on the traffic on the main road) which meant they might have been caught out by the cyclist's move.
@@davem9204 As a cyclist it’s easy to see why he did the move left. He was timing the right turn to wait for the white and blue cars to pass then going out straight after so he was basically wasting time but avoiding having to stop. Although the car turning right may not have known what he was doing he didn’t need to know. Neither did the cammer, because the cyclist didn’t get in anyone’s way and was on his way up the road before the car could turn, although it would then have needed to find a way past later.
On the subject of indicating, I indicate when I can and where I’m trying to tell vehicles something I need them to know, particularly approaching right turns into a minor road, so I want to make sure following cars expect me to move into the right of the lane. There are times when indicating is impossible because you need to be braking and/or changing gear, so it’s not quite the easy operation it is in a car.
As I just said in a different comment, as someone who has ridden a lot in both the UK and mainland Europe over the years, I can say with some authority that the UK's cycle infrastructure is 90% abysmal and pointless, and nobody (drivers and cyclists alike) is educated properly about cycling safety. I'm in Belgium at the moment, and things are so different here - cyclists almost always have high-quality lanes, but they key is that they *must* be used when they are present, even by racing bikers. This reduces conflict immensely - cyclists almost never have to ride on multi-lane roads or big roundabouts. In addition, drivers almost always give way to cyclists trying to cross roads - even where the road markings suggest otherwise - and cyclists themselves behave pretty impeccably in my experience. I've not seen a single red light runner in my time here, for example.
@iamjoestafford UK roads and bike lanes maybe abysmal, however this is no mitigation for lawless bike riider, which is about 99.999% of them.
I agree, if there is a bike lane, bikes should use them, but the simple fact is they refuse to do so and without full and proper legislation which is enforced, they will continue with their selfish arrogant entitled attitude.
There is no (almost) no training for bike riders. Even if there were, 99.99% of them are too stupid and arrogant to take riding lessons.
It seems to be a mindset and culture in the UK, that bikeys thing they are above the law & can do what ever they want. They seem to think racing on the road tour-de-france style, all in fancy dress, like a five year old wears a superman outfit is the way to ride on UK roads.
Should one dare to suggest they should be licenced & forced to take riding lessons, use cycle lanes or take suitable safety precautions like wear hi-viz, the pile on from every bikey everywhere is worse than upsetting a Liverpudlian.
Really interesting, and also frustrating that it can’t be like that here in the UK. The clip at about 3:10 is a good example…while the rider is not in a good position and not making themselves easy to see, Ashley suggests they should be on the “lovely” cycle path. Maybe it is lovely, but in my experience they’re anything but, and instead are bumpy, covered in grit and glass, and generally slower and less comfortable to ride on than roads.
@@thrillhous8888 Yes but that it a typical bikey reply, only selfishly thinking about themselves.
The bike lane is also there for MOTOR vehicles, to segregate them from the 'vulnerable' bikes, so they do not get blamed for collisions when knobbies try to undertake them at junctions.
The roads are full of speed humps, chicanes, bike lanes, pot holes, posts stuck in the road at 6"6' spacing. Motorists have to put up with a lot too.
The roads are cleared of grit due to the big bad motorists driving on it. Bikeys seem to forget that if they get all big bad motor vehicles banned, then the roads will be grit-laden just like the bikey lanes.
Rather than play dress-up sunday and going out clogging up the roads with pack racing, why don't the bikeys organise themselves and go out and sweep the bike paths?
Why don't the bikey groups get together and lobby parliament for bike excise duty, to solely be spent on sweeping the bike paths?
@@wibbley1 you’ve obviously got an agenda which is up to you, but the distinction between people who ride bikes and people who drive cars is weird. I do both, like loads of other people. I ride loads less than I drive. I only ride to get to work as it’s quicker than driving and getting a bus, and I do 90% of the hour long commute on a bike path, but I choose to do part of it on the road because it’s a lot quicker and I’m less likely to get a puncture. The point I was making is that people don’t have to use a bike paths just because it’s there. Just like I’d drive a route that’s quicker rather than deliberately drive on a slower road to the same place. Wouldn’t you do the same? Maybe get out on a bike for a bit and see things from another perspective. Might not change your mind, but surely it would make you more informed, rather than assuming everyone on a bike is playing dress up on a Sunday, which makes you sound a bit naive frankly.
@@thrillhous8888 I used to have a bike but I dumped it as I did not want to be associated with the knobs I see on their bikes. Either playing dressy-up lyrca like a five year old in their superhero costume or riding like entitled arrogant tw@ts.
I see it every day in London, 99.999% of them are totally lawless, jumping red lights, weaving around pedestrians and are a menace to other road users, as these clips show.
Bikeys often come up with the mealy-mouthed 'we don't have to use the bike lane' selfishly failing to understand it is not only for them, but to allow motorists to turn left without knobbers bombing up the inside and not have to worry about their usual menacing lawless riding.
Rather than JV riding like a knob in Regents Park, he could use his profile to highlight cycle lanes need brushing and lobby parliament, instead of spending his time looking to stage a confrontation. Same goes for bikey mikey and all the other anti-car groups pretending to be pro-bike.
Specially built cycle paths should be enforced and the roads they service should be made no cycle zones. I am not talking about shared areas. I mean those built for cyclists specifically.
They are usually built in response to a road having high accident rates.
This would make road use safer for all.
One of the questions on my driving test many years ago was what should I be aware of when a small child is near the road. The answer was be aware you cannot predict what they could do so be ready. It seems a lot of cyclist need to be treated as if they are 5 year old and you need to be ready for anything. I don't need to watch a compilation as I have seen a lot of this in real life.
Lots of training needed. Have you been to the new 'Mini Roads' space in Everton, Ashley? Might make a good video 🙂
It is refreshing to see cyclists themselves critiquing other poor rider behaviours - kudos all. What would you suggest is the best way to start dealing with this problem?
Thank you, I always call out bad cyclists as I myself don’t like being tarred with the same brush as them.
I’m a delivery rider and I condemn these cyclists.
Same here.
6:35 non issue if ppl went around. shoudnt even get with in 2-3m of each other there
6:44 there arent really that many time pressures, ive done this before. its just sheer greed and anger that fuels uber. fights and all sort break out because there are too many ppl working, still enough orders to be constantly going though.
you can be in no rush, follow the rules and still come out above min wage and up to £20 an hour if you are reasonable fit assuming no illegal ebike. considering no fuel, no insurance, no real maintenance that cant be done using RUclips and a few quid a month.
the people who do it think it should make them way more than it does for some reason, its a weird business that attracts not nice people
You kept saying that they broke the rules, they didn’t, they broke the LAW.
What law? You don't need to pass any test to ride a cycle on the road.
@@QuentinStephens They still need to obey the Road Traffic Act, if you don’t believe me ask the blackbeltbarrister.
Maybe if we start saying that the message might get across a bit better, ‘law’ is obviously more impactful than ‘rule’.
@Kieran.Rob53 maybe... hasn't worked out that way for other road users though so probably not.
As I understand it, it is a legit distinction and I would suggest that most of the instruction in the highway code is just rules to help keep people safe and are not backed directly by law.
Only the ones that say "must" are backed by laws.
Most use words like "should" and only get considered as mitigating factors if you get arrested for dangerous driving or the like.
Having said that it is fantastic (not) that cyclists are expected to obey the highway code and road traffic acts yet need undergo any instruction or pass any tests...
4:15 My clip! That's Crazy Dave, and I worked at the same company as him once. He was/is a a normal bloke with normal intelligence in real life.....
1:27 Nah, that is fine. Nothing worse, space for space for what car drivers do.
There have always been road cyclists running reds and not observing pedestrian crossings, however the rental bikes have made things a lot worse, every minute costs money, so there is an incentive to not follow the rules - not that it is worth it ultimately!
4:24 - There's nothing dangerous about this.....
..... For the truck driver. 😂
3:30 the hood and type of bike reminds me of 90% of indian guys on bikes near me, maybe know 3 of the HWC rules between the 10 of them. riding on the right side seems to be a theme you see
Thing about these cycling clips is that when push comes to shove they will always be worse off in an accident with no one to blame but themselves.
I don’t trust the police to not blame innocent car drivers (provided they really are innocent) in driver-cyclist collisions whereby the car doesn’t have dashcam
I've a dilemma from my club ride this week. I see someone on their way to the ride blast through a red light. I have a private word to say i wasn't impressed but a shrug and a "who cares" was the response.
On the ride he realises i have a camera on and takes great umbridge at not having given permission for this his image to be captured. I'm well known for riding with a camera in this club.
At the end of the ride he goes through the same red light again. The ride leaders are already miffed with him for not following instructions on pace and he's getting a bad reputation for himself.
How should I handle such behaviour? Does he have a point about group rides and cameras?
If you are out on the public roads there is no expectation of privacy. Your camera is fine.
This is just my opinion, but I'd say that the behaviour of club members outside of club activities is of no concern to the club unless the perpetrator is identifiable as a club member, for example, if he has a t-shirt on that identifies him as a club member.
Slipstreaming isnt safe not going to argue that. It is great fun though.
Amazing how many people are so keen to risk their lives
The most vulnerable road users often behave as the most invincible road users.
This is nothing out of the ordinary. I see it all the time. The worst offenders are those on push bikes because of the effort it takes to get going again from a standstill.
The change in the law as made this situation even worse. When you know the law gives you priority over cars then most people will take that for granted and expect the cars to be watching out for them even if they speed through red lights. I won't be shocked if the death rate for cyclists increases rather than decreases.
I would respectfully disagree. All of the cyclists in this edition will have been cycling in the same manner prior to the rule changes. In fact most of them will probably be blissfully unaware of changes to the HC and more likely than not the HC itself.
Neither myself or any other regular responsible cyclist have had a shift in our way of thinking and will continue to perceive motorists with extreme suspicion. The changes made to the HC were rewording and greater clarity to some of the more ambiguous rules in order to create a safer environment for all road users.
It is a false narrative to say that people who cycle now have a sense of entitlement due to these updates and has been fuelled by the media and enflamed further through social media.
Responsible cyclists still cycle responsibly. Irresponsible cyclists continue to cycle like tools. Granted there will be a handful who will challenge poor road craft. They are though few and far between and will have done the same prior to the updates.
@@TheGiff7while yes those of us who are responsible will be responsible no matter what transport we use, there are always going to be people that are idiots regardless of what transport they use and honestly since the rule changes, I've seen lots more adults riding atrociously than I did before the rule changes
Try riding a bicycle here in South Lincolnshire. Not one driver has noted the highway code changes at junctions and roundabouts etc. I always have to wait when crossing on my bike until there is no traffic as no driver gives me priority.
Tbh, cyclists should stop being encouraged to 'undertake', which is dangerous, especially considering it with 2 motor vehicles
If you can’t stop as quick as a car, don’t ride as fast as a car.
A lot of the riding here is shocking but all of them can stop ‘quicker’ than a car. A medium sized car weighs 1.5tonnes, a ‘heavy’ bike weighs 12kg there is a world of difference between the two. Not to mention your confusion of riding as fast as a car, 20mph on bike stops in a couple iches, cars in no way stop that quickly
@@stephenmurphy8310 'a couple inches'? 20mph is 8.94 meters per second. To decelerate from 8.94 meters per second to zero in a generous twelve inches is a deceleration of 131.1m/s². That's 13.36g. You're not staying on your bike through that, but that's okay: it doesn't have remotely enough traction to achieve that.
@@Monkeh616 I just calculated that I pull 0.2g, maybe over 0.3g, when emergency braking on my 15kg bicycle.
@@unsafevelocities5687 So about a fifth to a quarter of what a modern car can typically achieve in the dry before losing traction. Pretty good going, actually..
Is the nick a reference to a human predilection by any chance?
@@Monkeh616 That's with rim brakes too, by the way.
Wow, it is indeed! You're the first to get the reference in all the time I've been on here. 🖖
Competitors for the Posthumous Darwin Awards. It's only a matter of time.
7:20 - To be fair, what was that KIa waiting for, a signed invitation? Maybe they were too gobsmacked about the the cyclist haha. Also, loved that last clip, great driving and sense of humour.
Working on Londons roads you need to know two simple things.
1. Cyclists don't care because if they cause an accident you pick up the cheque.
2. Cyclists don't have any rules
0:32 - You are giving advice that is contrary to the highway code. Don't beat around the bush. Just say it's wrong and endangers people so they can actually get it into their head that they shouldn't undertake a vehicle and willingly put themselves in a dangerous situation.
Using the highway code, can you explain how the advice given was wrong, please?
@@stevejohnson506 He said the cyclist should yield to the vehicle turning left "just to be safe". The highway code says the jeep should yield because they are crossing the path of a cycle and the cyclist should therefore not slow down.
@@illegalopinions4082 I must have got the wrong end of the stick because you are correct.
@@stevejohnson506 Np
2:30 please tell me they actually had that song playing in the car. Please? 😇😂
I've been saying pretty much this about cyclists for literally years now. ~5:10 and this doesn't even surprise me because of how often I've seen it!
~4:30 - If you can't see my mirrors, I literally can't see you!
7:20 - The cyclist hasn't seen your cammer yet (and I know footage can take months to get from being shot to you uploading it).
Funny thing about the slip streaming at that speed, unless there's a head wind, it doesn't work, and in that case it's not slip streaming it's sheltering from the head wind.
Slip streaming, sometimes called a tow, is a specific function of aerodynamics. How it works and what is going on is really interesting.
It's definitely only to be used in racing, never on public roads.
There's some richard head cyclists around giving good cyclists a bad name.
Yeah there is, that’s why I’m calling them out by sharing my clips with Ashley.
@@MattCantor21 I respect that 🫡
NHS needs more organ donors…..carry on chaps!
Believe we’re still an opt-in system so that wouldn’t work unfortunately. Hopefully one day we’ll be an opt-out system which is much better.
Sadly, mince is not a transplantable organ.
Yes sorry but this Happens all over London and unfortunately there are not enough Police Officers about to stop them ! But as a Predestine I am so sick of them Cycling on the Pavement like they have a Right to go into us if they in our Space ?.
Was the Land Rover signalling in the first clip?
Still too quick from the cyclist and complete lack of observation from the driver
Accidents often happen when two people make a minor error at the same time.
@@mattjones6115 The Swiss cheese effect.
@@mattjones6115 The landrover made no mistake.
Bikey was not filtering, but riding recklessly, too fast, whilst undertaking vehicles at a junction.
@@PedroConejo1939 No swiss cheese. Knobby was riding recklessly, rather than filtering at a safe speed, instead was blasting up the inside and had no intention of joining the flow of traffic at the junction.
Had the bikey of had proper riding lessons, they would have been taught how and where to filter safely. Bikey did neither here.
No fault on landrover.
@@wibbley1 not checking your mirrors is minor mistake.
Most schools in the UK no longer offer cycling proficiency courses these days, due to cost constraints and I think that's a big part of the problem. When I was young everyone did cycling proficiency and we even had a small park that had a good set up to teach us. The park had a setup that mimicked the roads, complete with traffic lights, pedestrian crossings and a roundabout specifically to teach us safe cycling. I don't see any such set ups anywhere in the UK today unfortunately.
I think many US schools no longer teach basic roadcraft, either. it should be part of basic curriculum, along with civics - which pretty obviously isn't taught in US schools, any more.
439000 primary aged children received Bikeability 1 training in England and 60000 in Scotland in 2021/22
Looks like cycle helmets should be replaced with Hachimaki 😉
No selection of clips would be complete without someone unnecessarily sounding their horn, in this case, when the two cyclists crossed in front of the car approaching the T junction.
To no one's surprise, the cyclists didn't disappear and the noise simply disturbed the peace!
It let the cyclists know their cycling was dangerous, so maybe it might make them think a bit more in the future?
@@davem9204 It's neither. It's simply a way of venting anger. Utterly pointlessly.
2:49..... may I be so bold as to suggest a name for riders like this.... CHORLTONS ... now, what is a Chorlton. A Chorlton is defined as any cyclist who pays as little attention to what is going on around them as if they were walking in a pedestrianist manner. (Google Chorlton and the wheelies).
Brakes, where we are going we don't need any brakes.
Some of these cyclists are in danger of NOT seeing their next birthday
I am obviously not going to claim that slipstreaming a lorry (or a bus or any motor vehicle really) can be done safely. It will always be an increased risk. Even more so on a wet road like the clip at 4:09. On a dry road a concentrated cyclist should at least be able to out-brake the big vehicle unless they are centimeters behind it. Obviously the not seeing and being hidden still applies. On wet road even the ability to stop if the lorry stops starts being questionable. Personally I grew out of this about 15 years ago but I have to admit that in my twenties I did occasionally catch a slipstream behind a trolleybus on my way to work and it took some experience and maturity to stop doing that.
But I am curious what others think about this: is it the same level of stupidity as blasting through an intersection on red? To me those clips seem way worse. Tiny misjudgment in timing and the cyclist will be hit by a car sideays, quite posibly thrown under another moving car etc. Both the probability of a crash and the likely consequences of that crash seem to be worse than being tightly behind a lorry.
So do the clips where the cyclist is overtaking a queue of cars and the oncoming cars have to make space for him. One driver who is distracted does not move and the cyclist is sandwiched between two cars, potentially with not enough space to fit a human without braking some bones to make him more compact.
The big thing for me which is rarely mentioned is regarding oncoming vehicles who turn right as soon as the lorry has passed. There is a high possibility if the cyclist isn't extremely close that they will be missed and tagged by the vehicle turning.
Used to see it a lot in the 60s and 70s, usually behind double-decker buses (nice draft?). Never fancied all those fumes myself.
@AshleyNeal-JustCycling yes, that is definitely a thing. The cyclist can mitigate this particular risk if they know how. Move closer to the lorry and more left before the intersection so that the turning car physically cannot turn sharp enough to hit them. Or move back and behind the right corner to see and be seen. This applies also whenever a cyclist is in a line of moving cars riding at speed same as the cars. Any driver not concentrating enough sees a gap in cars, the cyclist is invisible to them. So they turn through the "gap". The above described positioning seems to work well against this risk.
@@PedroConejo1939 That is why those trolleybusses on my way to work were so tempting back then - no fumes 🙂. And the old ones had very boxy shape with almost sharp corners, so nice big draft area behind them too. I never tried it but I think the ones used today are significantly more aerodynamic so you would get less out of them at the same distance.
There was a clip from a RUclips cyclist who was “drafting” behind a bus then went to move left at the same time as a pedestrian went to cross behind the bus. I commented, along with others, about how the position behind the bus meant the pedestrian likely thought they had enough time to cross between the bus and other cyclists behind the cammer.
Oh how wrong was I according to the cycling fraternity that follow that particular channel. Apparently it was all on the pedestrian for not making sure it was safe and how the cyclist did a perfect job in avoiding the collision. At no point did he, or others, accept that riding too close to the bus caused half of the incident
Many grown-up cyclists are bonkers! How are you gonna use the roads without knowing the rules of road? How are you gonna put your own life in somebody else's hands? 🤯